FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1913
1913 - 1084.PDF
(/ycHT) "Dear Sirs,—The committee of the Royal Aero Club have con sidered the question of your failure to pay to Mr. Brock the prize which he won in the above competition, and they feel that it is essential that they should support him in his rights. "When you appeared before the Competitions Committee to explain why you had failed to carry out the award of the stewards of that meeting, it appeared that either you were not properly acquainted with, or else had misinterpreted the rules under which you advertised that the competition was to be held, viz., those of the Royal Aero Ctub. " The rules which you, as promotors, infringed are Nos. 29 and 33. Under these rules, M. Brindejonc des Moulinais' entry was null and void, and his name should have been erased from the programme. " The decision of the stewards of the meeting, awarding the prize to Mr. Brock, visa in order. It was duly communicated to you, and you should either have acted upon it or lodged an appeal to the stewards of the club. They, as you are aware, are independent of the club committee, and iorm the court of appeal in aeronautical sport in this country. "The committee must, therefore, call upon you to intimate your willingness to carry out the award and hand the prize to the rightful winner. "As it appears from your letter of October 3rd, 1913, that you desire to appeal to the stewards of the Club, the committee will be prepared to facilitate your doing so if a definite intimation to that effect reaches me within three days of your receipt of this letter. •' Yours faithfully, "HAROLD E. PERRIN, Secretary." So far as we are able to gather by reading in between the lines of the dispute, the Grahame-White Aviation Co. appears to have thought that the disqualification of M. Brindejonc des Moulinais was arbitrarily carried out on his own responsibility, by the secretary of the Club. Had that been so, we frankly acknowledge that we should have looked askance at the exercise of any such arbitrary function, without the necessary reference to the Club Committee. A body exercising the functions of the Royal Aero Club, which must often have to take action that is distasteful to those under its control, and which may on occasion even look like injustice, cannot be too zealously careful in its administrative methods. But there does not seem to be any suggestion that the disqualification was in fact carried out on the responsibility of any one individual. We have before us the letters sent by Mr. Grahame- White and Mr. Gates to the Club, in which they tender their resignations, each practically repeating, as their reason, the terms of their letter set out above, the con cluding paragraph of Mr. Grahame-White's reading thus : " It was not until yesterday's (October 2nd) Committee meeting that it was fully brought home to me that such a course had been pursued with the complete approval of the said committee, otherwise my resignation would have been tendered ere this." That, together with a similar statement by Mr. Gates, appears to dis pose of any suggestion that might have been made OCTOBER II, 1913. to the effect that the withdrawal of M. Brindejonc des Moulinais' certificate was anything but, the official act of the Club, approved and authorised by the Committee. It will be seen I from the letter sent by the Club to the Grahame-White Co. that there is still a way open to the Company in regard to the original decision of the Club, subject to the other competitors agreeing to abide by any ruling. That is by appeal to the stewards of the Club. Without that consent, however, we are at loss to see how this will help much in the end. The point as we see it is this. The Club, under its regulations, disqualifies the competitor who, starting hors concours, finished first in the race. He knew, and the promoters of the meeting knew, before he started, that he could take no part in the race proper. What is even more germane to the issue is that the other competitors, equally bound by the Club's regulations, knew that he was disqualified from taking part, and thus it seems to us that they have a legal right to dispute any finding which might reinstate a competitor who, by a breach of the Club's regulations,, had been already disqualified. Otherwise the Club's regulations are reduced to a dead letter. We say nothing at all as to the justice of the original disqualification. That is entirely beside the point so far as this issue is concerned. What we have tr> keep in mind is that, the thing having been done it is difficult to see how it can be altered or modified. As a matter of sentiment it was certainly felt at the time that the Club might have shown a little more leniency to M. Brindejonc des Moulinais, and have imposed a less drastic penalty than it did. On the other hand, it must not be lost to sight that at that time—in May last—there was considerable public outcry about flying over populous districts, and sternly restrictive legis lation was being demanded. It was doubtless this fact that the Club had in mind when it took the action which is now the subject of so much acrimonious discussion, and from that point of view it is possible to acquit the Club of any considered severity of an undue character. The police court proceedings and decision were, it must be remembered, subsequent to the Whit- Monday racing, and would not therefore be in evidence in time to morally justify the Club Committee in re-issuing M. des Moulinais' competitor's certificate. But, however the matter may be argued, or whatever the opinions of the individual may be as to its merits,, everyone who has the welfare of the movement at heart will deplore the consequences which such a dispute may easily bring about, and we shall hope to see a more tolerant spirit enter into the dispute. 9fi 8 F. B. FOWLE1 PILOT-CONSTRUCTOR. THE subject of our full page portrait this week is a self- taught pilot. He purchased a Bleriot monoplane with a 25 h.p. Anzani engine in the summer of 1911, and practised with it at the old Beaulieu aerodrome, persever ing until he had thoroughly mastered the art of flying. He then purchased three BleYiots from Messrs. MacArdle and Drexel, who were giving up the Beaulieu aerodrome, and transferred them to Eastbourne, where he opened a school on Dec. ist, 1911. That Mr. Fowler was engaged as an engineer before taking up flying, having served his time with Messrs. Vickers, Sons and Maxim, Ltd., to a large extent, no doubt, accounts for the excel lent service which has been obtained from those original machines which have been flown continuously since the opening of the school, and have been the means of a good many pilots qualifying for their certificates. On Jan. 8th, 1912, Mr. Fowler attempted to fly from Beaulieu to Eastbourne on Mr. Drexel's 50 h.p. Gnome-Bleriot, but he got lost in the fog over the Solent. He came downr and his machine, striking the water when going all out, turned over on top of him, the pilot narrowly escaping a. watery grave. He was fortunately seen by the Coastguards,, who sent a boat to his aid, and landed him at Calshot, little the worst for his adventure. A week later he qualified for his pilot's certificate at Eastbourne on a 50 h.p. Gnome-Bleriot. In addition to flying Bleriot monoplanes of various types, Mr. Fowler has piloted Sommer, Bristol and Farman biplanes. At present he is the managing director of the Eastbourne Aviation Co., Ltd., and this year he has done a good deal of waterplane work, his records showing that since July ist he has taken, up over 200 passengers. " THE HAWK." IIIO V
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
